TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (11) TMI 253
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....A) has erred on facts and in law in deleting the addition of Rs. 63,82,442/- on a/c of lease rental paid even though it was a provision debited to P & L a/c. 3. The Ld.CIT(A) has erred on facts and in law in deleting the addition of Rs. 11,11,500/- on a/c of Legal & Professional cast even though it was a provision debited to P & L A/c. 4. The Ld.CIT(A) has erred on facts and in law in deleting the addition of Rs. 52,56,526/- on a/c of Travel Cost/travelling expenses even though it was a provision debited to P & L a/c. 5. The ld has erred on facts and in law in deleting the addition of Rs. 1,17,85,481/- on a/c of selling cost amount even though it was a provision debited to P & La/.c. 6. The Ld.CIT(A) has ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ds lease rental paid has been claimed as deduction from the profits resulted from profit & loss account as per the 'Computation of Taxable Income' filed during the course of assessment proceedings. The Assessing Officer observed that no details/explanation nor any supporting document has been furnished /provided in respect of deduction of Rs. 63,82,442/- claimed. Therefore, in the absence of details and supporting documents deduction of Rs. 63,82,442/- disallowed the same and the amount reduced from the profits as peer 'Computation of Taxable Income' was added to the declared income. 5. As regards the Legal and Professional Cost, the Assessing Officer observed that from the perusal of details of Legal & Professional cost of Rs. 91,18,881....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Global 3,58,290/- Grand Total 1,17,85,481/- The Assessing Officer held that no supporting documents was provided in respect of above persons of having vendors of the assessee company's products, therefore, the payments made credited to the above mentioned persons in contravention of Provisions of Section 40(a) (ia) of the Income Tax Act, were disallowed and added to the income of the assessee company. 8. The CIT(A) while deciding the case held in Para 9.2 as under:- "9.2 I have carefully considered the assessment order and the submissions made by the Id. AR on the above issues as well as the documents placed on record as part of the paper book. At the outset, I find that the above grounds are academic in na....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....were not exigible to tax deduction at source u/s 195 of the Act as there was no income accruing or arising in India in the hands of the said non-resident parties in view of Section 9(1)(vii) of the Act read with Section 90(2) and the treaty provisions as per the India-USA DTAA. On careful consideration of the matter, I find that the AO has completely misconstrued the facts and legal provisions with regard to the above additions. The AO has also not given any adverse material observation whatsoever against the above submission of the appellant and the voluminous details filed as part of the remand proceeding. The AO has also not been able to make out any case for TDS u/s 195 in the case of selling cost. In view of the above, the impugned add....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... The CIT(A) has given its correct finding in Para 9.2. The AO has made the impugned disallowances on the ground that no particulars were filed in respect of the lease rentals paid, the legal and professional cost and travel cost were in the nature of provision and no TDS has been made in respect of the selling cost. In this regard, it is argued by the Id. AR that the AO never asked for the specific details of expenses and the above expenses were actually incurred during the year under consideration and were not in the nature of provision. The Id. AR has filed voluminous documents and details as part of the paper book evidencing that the above expenses were actually incurred and the same were for the purpose of the assessee's business. Simil....